Slashman wrote on Dec 17, 2010, 16:22:WoW may cover all the basics when it comes to a standard fantasy MMO, but there isn't a single outstanding thing about it that you can't find in some other game. It simply managed to put a lot of systems together and polish them up(its what Blizzard does).

And that IS the single outstanding thing about WOW that no other game comes close to, the experience as a whole. I've tried to get friends to switch to other MMOs, but they inevitably go back to WOW because other are missing certain quality features that WOW players take for granted.

And the lack of LAN support means that you can only play SC2 on Blizzard's terms. Both things have had a big impact.

Bullshit. Korea's PC Bangs are dominated by MMO games, which have no LAN support at all. LAN is a non-issue for Korean gamers. SC2 has been an enormous success in NA and Europe, despite the lack of LAN support and BNET 2.0, and the competitive SC2 scene outside of Korea has completely eclipsed the competitive SC1 scene. The question is why has SC2 not reached the same level of success in Korea, and the answer is that Korea's RTS scene is still dominated by SC1's better (for now) gameplay.

The truth of the matter is that SK's scene wouldn't be the same without KeSPA. Blizzard may not be trying to strictly destroy competitive SC1, but they're certainly saying "our way or the highway". They won't mind destroying all the scene if they're not the ones controlling it.

The pro SC1 scene was around for years before KeSPA swooped in to create the player abusing draconian system that it is today. KeSPA wouldn't have a scene at all if Blizzard didn't make SC, so stop trying to pull that "THEY OWE IT ALL TO KESPA" garbage. The fact of the matter is that KeSPA is every bit as stubborn as Blizzard. KeSPA would rather let the pro-SC1 scene burn than to relinquish any bit of control to Blizzard. They are every bit as guilty as Blizzard for putting their own interest ahead of the fans.

I hope they keep playing SC and not SC2 in Korea. SC2 and BNET 2.0 (which is the real thing they're selling) are poisoned fruit.

This is just pure selfishness. The SC1 scene has been stagnant for years, with no growth in viewership. Esports needs to evolve beyond SC1 or it'll die a slow painful death into obscurity. Top SC1 players like Jaedong have seen that SC2 is the future, and have stated that they will one day join the likes of Boxer, July, and Nada in SC2.

Kosumo wrote on Nov 28, 2010, 15:21:I think that there is truth to it. I also believe that all the talk of the "PRO" gaming scene in Korea is over stated too. So they had tournaments broadcast live on TV ..... have you seen some of the other programs broadcast on Asian channels? Being broadcast on TV does not make you the NFL.

1. Starcraft is not merely "broadcast on TV". There are 2 channels who's main programming is Starcraft, OnGameNet and MBCGame, and finals fill stadiums with tens of thousands of people in attendance.

2. That $1million figure is BS. Even the most popular pro gamer in history, Slayers_Boxer, only made ~$300K a year at the height of his success. Meanwhile, if you're a lower tier player, you'd be barely scraping by at below minimum wages.

3. The relative lack of success of Starcraft 2 is not due to lack of LAN support, or the shitty-ness of BNET 2.0. Considering that Korea has ubiquitous broadband access, and most gamers play in internet cafes anyways, LAN is a non-issue. The fact is Starcraft is the gold standard for RTS games in Korea, and no other RTS has ever come close to dethroning it. Starcraft 1 has 12 years of polish and 1 expansion advantage on SC2, and as it stands right now, it is simply the better game. However, SC2 is getting more popular, as its pro-scene takes off and more and more famous SC 1 players are making the transition.

4. Blizzard is not trying to destroy competitive SC1. Whats going on is not about money, but control of the IP. KeSPA feels that they created the competitive SC1 scene, and therefore should have ownership of it, which doesn't sit well with Blizzard. Its a pissing contest between two companies, and KeSPA is hardly the victim here.

Thatís right nin, I did. I stood by my morals and didnít let all the hype of this game or Blizzard make go out and impulse buy their mediocre craptastic game. Maybe you donít have any morals and where one of the people who was lead blindly into buying SC2.

Maybe if more people stood by their morals instead of being impulsive about buying a game that was all hype, CGI and no bark developers like Blizzard would get the point. And dont fool yourselves into thinking that blizzard made this game for americans, because they didnt.

The fact is that SC2 has the most quality, content, and replayability of any PC game released since the Orange Box. But Yeah, keep on feeding yourself whatever bullshit you need to maintain your biases and your illusion of superiority. The easiest way to hate something is to know nothing about it.

Warskull wrote on Oct 25, 2010, 23:07:The original creator of DotA is long gone. That would be Eul, Guinsoo stole an unprotected copy of the map and released his own version that happened to catch on (I don't believe he credited the original creator either.) Icefrog, who now work for Valve, took over and did a great deal to fix the balance and coding of the map.

Most WC3 maps have a history of changing hands (often without consent) and people taking credit for other people's work.

Guinsoo didn't "steal" anything. Guinsoo made DOTA-Allstars, which like many DOTA variants, was based off of Eul's original DOTA (which itself was based off of Aeon of Strife). Guinsoo's version took off because he created the formula of modern DOTA (like 5 heroes per team, item recipes, etc) Icefrog took over DOTA-Allstars from Guinsoo after version 6, and later renamed DOTA-Allstars to just Dota. Sure Icefrog added a lot of content and polish to the game, but his role is arguably much less important in the creation of the MOBA gametype.

You haven't cited anything on this and this is the first I've heard of it so /shrug.

It's in one of the blog posts, and also a rumor on the HoN boards for a while now. Even if you don't believe the blog posts/rumors, it's no secret that HoN is porting heroes directly from DotA: see Faerie Dragon and Bubbles which are the same thing, ability for ability. Since Valve attempted to trademark Dota, and is releasing the original roster in full, it not unlikely that they also tried to claim ownership of said heroes.

I don't think that's unreasonable either, you literally asked people to judge things based on a blog and forum post.

Read my posts again and stop making stuff up. I never claimed those posts are true, and if the posts are true, it actually shift the blame away from Valve to Icefrog, who mislead Valve. The posts don't really matter, because the fact is Icefrog is not the creator of Dota. He only added content to a pre-existing map. Just because Valve hired Icefrog does not give Valve ownership to other people's work. This has been stated time and time again, and you are being unreasonable by continuing to ignore this fact.

PHJF wrote on Oct 13, 2010, 15:52:That is exactly what they did with Counter-Strike.

No. Both creators of Counterstrike, Minh Le and Jess Cliffe, were hired by Valve. Like I said, DotA isn't like all of Valve's other acquisitions. There is no core dev team for DotA that Valve can just buy out.

Also, these articles claim that Icefrog was working for S2, makers of HoN (another DotA clone) for years, meaning that S2 may own the rights to some of DotA's heroes:

Is anyone else pissed off at Valve for doing this? DotA isn't like Teamfortress, or DoD, or Portal, or L4D, or Alienswarm where Valve can sweep in, buy off the entire development team and the trademark along with it. Dota's a community made game, and Icefrog is merely the last of dozens of people who have contributed to the map. Hiring one guy and then laying claim to the work of others is Valve stealing from and abusing the community.

The only way this is fair is if Valve releases the game for free and does not gain ownership of the name.

No, only a handful are worth building in every city. Specialized cities are going to build the buildings that improve their specialization.

Again, only a handful are worth building. Due to poor design choices, there is a whole list of buildings that are useless/not cost effective in ANY city.

Removing extraneous game elements doesn't make a game more simplistic. It makes it less cluttered. Civ IV, as much as I enjoyed it, was very much an over-cluttered game.

That may be how you feel, but I find it ridiculous that anyone would consider things like religion, with its diplomatic and strategic implications, and synergy with certain civics, extraneous. And removing health turns resources like cattle, once important for city growth, into completely useless tiles of shit.

Oh my god, I didn't realize that they actually made the game not allow you to have everything!! Who knew they'd actually make you make strategic choices that might affect how you decide to play the game?!?

Snarky remark aside, did you even read what I wrote? You tell me how having a large empire prevents you from winning a culture victory makes any strategic sense. Good strategic games forces you to make intelligent, not arbitrary choices. This change from Civ 4 is just asinine.

Just wait until your honeymoon period with Civ 5 is over and you start noticing the giant cracks in the foundation.

People keep saying it's "simplistic" with no evidence to back that claim up. What exactly supposedly makes it simplistic? And in what way is it more simplistic? Personally, I think that adjusting a slider is much simpler than the economic system they have now. Combat has more depth. Various resources are scarcer, requiring more strategy in planning. I don't find it more simplistic, I do find they stripped away some of the extraneous non-fun parts.

Combat may have more depth, but the AI does NOT know how to handle this new tactical warfare. At least with Civ 4 stacks the AI can brute force its way to semi-effectiveness. With war being such an important part of Civ 5, the AI having the intelligence of a vegetable does not make the game fun.

The game is also lacking from a builder's perspective. Building maintenance is so high that, despite a long list of unique buildings, only a handful are actually worth building. This is especially true given the lower production capability of your cities compared to Civ 4. Food resource bonuses only give you +1 food, which is somehow worse than riverside farms, and totally pales in comparison to the ridiculously broken and overpowered maritime state bonuses.

Some elements which were removed from the game or replaced, like religion, city health and civics make the game more simplistic. Furthermore, the design choices that they put into place instead do not work very well.

Social policies for example, depend on culture to unlock what is essentially another tech tree. However, the game punishes you for having more cities - forcing you to make the nonsensical choice of having a larger empire, or having better culture and SP's.

Is Civ 5 a bad game? No. It does a lot of great things. But I'll be shelving it until an expansion comes out and fixes this broken game.

Luke wrote on Sep 25, 2010, 11:14:well to get on your track and the way you like to call peps everything from a-z because they don't like you faceshet game , " It takes a Retard to see a Retard "

While I appreciate the obvious troll, I think your skill level is ready for the more advanced, subtle art of trolling. For example, complaining about SC2 facebook integration on Bluesnews, which itself has facebook integration, is a bit too obvious. No one is THAT retarded in real life, so it's hard for people to believe that you're being serious.

But other than that simple mistake, you're doing a great job of trolling. With your dedication and persistence, I think you'll become a master troll some day. Keep up the good work!

Selektaa wrote on Sep 25, 2010, 09:55:Have you been taking lessons from westy over at Videosift? The angry retard trolling style really rings a bell. Really, what's anyone supposed to say to refute your comment that Starcraft II is shit? We can't objectively prove you wrong (you're wrong, btw) and you're obviously just trolling.

I think Westy has a disability, and is not trolling on purpose.

Luke wrote on Sep 25, 2010, 07:43:so so if it aint the master of getting personal(lol you can't spell lol lol , well it seems to me you can read it so i guess it is not that bad) because you have nothing else to say , well gz to you i do know i dislike your lovely game (you may be the biggest fanboy ) who is the lowest you think , the one saying nay , or the one who only can get personal when some1 dishes a fanboys game

Hey man, I'm congratulating you on your well crafted troll post. That takes intelligence and skill. The spelling is just as bad as the content, which is a very nice touch. I can see that you're a man who cares about the little details. But be careful. Just like in Tropic Thunder, your last post kinda went full retard, and thus loses some of its charm.

ASeven wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 22:02:Going to any of the popular torrent sites shows there are more downloads for the PS3 as a whole than the Xbox360, and that's saying something since the 360 download numbers were massive.

I call BS. I checked a few sites and not a single PS3 game was on the top 20 in gaming. Even massively popular recent 360 releases like Halo Reach have a tiny fraction of the numbers of older PC games.

Jailbreaking a PS3 is easier than copying a file to a pen. Oh sorry, it's as easy as that.

So it took hackers 4 years to discover how to copy a file to a pen? If only everything is that easy.

No, it took them 4 years to write the piece of code that gets transfered to the pen.

Yeah. I'm sure millions of PS3 pirates are very happy that they'll finally be able to play that illegal copy of Resistance after all these years. The casual console crowd was just waiting by their bluray burners for piracy to become this easy. Soon, console piracy will become not only significant, but will overtake the PC.

NicklePop wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 21:15:Pirates ruin everything. I agree the developers should release anyway, but the root cause is the moronically selfish PC game pirates.

Idiots, all of them.

Exactly! And we all know there is absolutely no piracy on consoles!!!

Totally. Piracy on consoles is way easier than on PCs. I mean just look at how many PS3's have working mod chips. And the number of casual gamers with modded 360's is just bananas. It's not like there's the constant threat of getting caught on Xbox live and totally borking your console or anything like that.